Chris Brogan: Casting Your Net and the Beauty of Fish
westerad
· 8 months ago
Chris - Great couple of posts on strategy and implementation of social media for business. This is what a lot of our clients are looking for but they have no clue how to start of even where to begin. So they are looking for us - their agency - to advise and assist.
A little back story, we are a small, second generation family owned advertising agency that works regionally from Iowa with several larger small business clients (around 100 employees or more) with a couple larger fish as outliers. As I said above, most want to start leveraging social media but don't know where to start. I have outlined a plan of implementation that is a lot like what you mention (2-3 outposts to start - blogging + facebook + twitter or youtube or some combo based on the business). But again, when I present they often say - "Good. Go and do it. We are too busy selling cars or [insert industry task here] to do this plus we don't have the people that know how." So I am somewhat reluctantly kicking off programs as these clients that I hope to "teach them to fish" in the near term as I believe that's how they will truly reap the rewards.
Having said all of this - we are not a traditional 'agency' either. We work very closely with our clients (some of which we've had for over 25 years) so we really function as off-site marketing for several of them. I am rambling but thought you might like to hear a small implementation story from the small biz trenches of Iowa.
Cheers, Nick Westergaard, Westergaard Advertising @westerad | nick@westerad.com
Brenna Sowder
· 8 months ago
Chris, This is a great post and a super analogy. Fishing is something that takes every bit of care and dedication one possesses (and a perhaps a bit more grit and salt than this analogy carries) -- an online presence needs tending! Even if it can't happen every day or in every way, each brand adviser should keep this story going: it's about interaction and that "concierge" service you mention above. When you post or respond, make it count! And when you're not posting, don't just walk away -- listen, monitor and move to catch those fishes. Thanks for bringing me back to the docks for a moment with this analogy and being so spot on about it :)
Tim Andren
· 8 months ago
Nice analogy Chris. I also like to use the analogy of sailing. A good social media presence can be like charting your course for where you want your company to grow with your sails ready - your connected crowd can propel your business forward with strong gusts of interest that a standard campaign alone could never generate.
I've done a fair bit of fishing in my life and can find many great parallels when compared to the subjects of social media marketing. All great fishermen know a great deal about their environment, the fundamental reasons why fish bite among other things. They can look at all these factors and intuitively predict where the fish will trend and when.
Sailing and fishing. Sounds dreamy.
Mary H Ruth
· 8 months ago
Chris, this is a fabulous post! Guess I should have known you are a poet.
BUT, I object to "If your company is selling roofing, it might take forever to find people on Twitter and Facebook. It’d be a lot cheaper to buy ads in newspapers and buy better spots in the Yellow Pages."
Is the online advantage only for white collar peeps? No,no,no,no,no. That denies the value completely. Local brick and mortars, just as much as anyone, need to adapt the web to their uses, and figure out how to make it work.
Online marketing takes longer, maybe, but only at first. With consistent attention (as you say), it's far more productive, even for roofers.
chrisbrogan
· 8 months ago
@Mary - you raise a good point. It's not a white-collar only thing, but the adoption is certainly on a curve. That's just trends and observation. Local restaurants, say, use the web products like Yelp and blogs to improve their online presence.
But if the buyers aren't exactly there yet, I wouldn't make it a big part of the mix.
Critt Jarvis
· 8 months ago
> Look for conversion points that bring your business objectives forward
Exactly. I've just come home from the second day of an intensive training program: to manage a store operation for Cumberland Farms. What's so cool, for me, is that as a vertically integrated company, our organization is chock full of opportunity to meaningfully deploy a set of tools which could enable conversation points, taken directly from Cumberland Farms' mission statement and desired goals, that support our business objectives.
Internal communications? You bet. Integrated marketing? Yes, of course. But for me, personally, a passion for community presence. *That's* corporate responsibility, yes?
dkreitzberg
· 8 months ago
Great posts which present a clear vision of how to think about, and become engaged with, social marketing without getting lost in the clouds. The distinction between conversation and marketing, the concept of slowly getting your feet wet and having someone help you rig your lines (but you're the one who ultimately needs to fish) were all important take-aways.
Brett Borders
· 8 months ago
Chris,
You are rocking it with this segment! Really polished insights, totally worth reading and sharing.
Keith Burtis
· 8 months ago
Chris, this is a great post. It truly applies to us that are working in the sandbox rather than just playing in it. You know I am a long time reader of your blog, and I see daily the number of comments you get. A while back I commented on your "train ride" post. While well written and thought out like all of your posts it was not chest deep in strategy. (It got at least 60 comments)
Posts like this really get past what I like to call the fluffy stuff on top of the cake, yet it seems to get much fewer in comments. Of course I'm sure there will be 100 comments here tomorrow and I'll be eating my shoe, but I am finding the same to be true on my blog. Chat about twitter and avatars gets massive comments, but really dive deep and it tends to get less engagement.
Lets keep stretching this thing. Thank you for your mentorship.
AnaRC
· 8 months ago
Amazing post Chris! I am sharing it with my readers not only for the great content but also because of the poetic approach. I also think that a company should have a clear goal and target in place before they jump into Social Media. Results can be tangible and there are many tools to measure them. This should be the case specially if the initiative does not come from the CEO or a Board member. I've seen too many cases where the company has a great start but management does not get it. The often think that is a waste of time and resources. So a clear strategy is key.
Chris thanks a million for all of your incredible insight. You challenge us to be smarter and more creative every day.
DebLawrence
· 8 months ago
Thank you for your insight. The emphasis on relationships is key. I plan to share with some of my colleagues.
Erin
· 8 months ago
I appreciate all that you do Chris! Thank you for thinking these things through so thoroughly and sharing it all with us. Your blog is the first one I check every morning.
frank barry
· 8 months ago
"Tending the nets" ... good way to think about the traditional "add value" thought. It seems this really comes down caring about what your doing and the people in your community.
@Chris ... i see you added DISQUS comments to your blog recently. Cool. I'm curious as to why you added/changed from the other way?
When does it make sense for a company/nonprofit to 'jump-in' ... ?? I know strategy, thought, planning, goal setting, etc... all is need and has it's place, but sometimes people need to "just do it" right? When does this approach make sense?
Or, when does it make sense for a company/nonprofit to start blogging or using Twitter (or what ever else makes sense for them) without shouting out that they are there ... but just softly jumping into the game to get their feet wet, learn, develop a voice/strategy on the fly?
Hi Nick- I love your model. I think that more "offsite marketing departments" are going to be the way things roll in 2009 and into 2010. Your plans make sense to me. : )
tom martin
· 8 months ago
Chris,
As usual a great, informative post. BUT, I do have a challenge with one of your points.
"This means, if you’re thinking that this chore belongs in your agency, I say no. That’s like being invited to chat with Britney Spears, and finding out you’re talking with her assistant. Oh wait, that’s how Britney does it."
Companies should worry less about where their SM person sits and more about who that SM person is. Your comment implies that corp side marketers are better suited to be the ongoing voice of a brand online than their agency counterparts. Why would that be true for more than a single moment or small grouping of moments in time?
Ann, John and all those other folks you can talk to -- they aren't the brand. They're temporary stewards of the brand. If they follow the path that statistically most folks follow with regard to job/companies held in a lifetime, they'll move on. And if they're smart, they'll pass your tended relationship to their successor. But there will be a successor.
Regardless of where that person sits, you're talking to Brittney's assistant. Because Britney doesn't exist and a real, physical manner. She's a phantom tended to and made real by her assistant.
Which brings me to the second half of my point. Your comment seems to suggest that corporate brand managers are better versed in the brand. That they have longer brand histories. And that they are better brand stewards? Sometimes yes, but sometimes times no.
The truth is, Brand Managers change as often and sometimes more often than agency folks. As do the folks that manage almost every aspect of brand marketing today.
Case in point.
After Katrina I returned to TM Advertising (Dallas) and took a long-term project on the American Airlines account while I figured out my next move. TM/AA is where I cut my teeth after college. It had been almost 12 years since I worked on the biz. When I went over to AA for my first meeting, not a single brand manager was there from my first tour of duty. Not one.
But on the agency side of the table, 3 of the 4 senior account folks were the same (including the 2nd in command), the lead creative team (writer/art director) was the same, and the lead Interactive guy was the guy that hired me in 1992.
TM had far more institutional brand knowledge then their client counterparts. These clients had read the files, but their agency partners had written those files. So I ask you, if AA started a SM program right now, where should that SM person sit? Agency side or client side?
My point: the day of the corporate man is over. People in marketing switch positions all the time, whether they are client or agency side is really somewhat irrelevant if you ask me. What matters is, does the person get SM, do they have deep product/brand knowledge, and are they in a position to converse and respond to consumers in real time. If that can only happen with folks that sit inside the company, then so be it. But to issue a blanket statement that says they have to sit in the company or they somehow can't be "the real brand" is incorrect and an unfair slight to agencies that are doing SM for their clients, some quite well. IMHO
Anyhow, my 02. Keep up the great work.
@TomMartin
tojosan
· 8 months ago
Good read as usual. How long is a great question. Not long enough or available enough is so often the answer companies take.
Where or where is PepsiCo for example. They are slow to respond and not very engaging. If anything they should be leading the charge to get folks talking about their products organically instead of coming up with a lame Pepsi Throwback ad. (Wolfman Jack that guy isn't.)
Where's the on the ground approach of SxSW? They were there, in person, delivering, sharing, and talking about their products. What are they doing now?
Fishing is one of my favorite hobby, I'm having so much fun with this activity. But before I can go fishing my wife would always make me clean our backyard and so does our Bin
Mimi
· 3 months ago
what a nice way to explain the strategy to be used in social marketing
what a nice way to explain good strategy to be used in social media and marketing :)
skin care
· 2 months ago
Yup,My desire is for more concise explanations of what’s going on. While it can be tough to do politically, that is what gives me the best experience as a user.
nutritionals
· 2 months ago
I admire the time and effort you put into your post. I wish I had the same drive :)
usana
· 1 month ago
wow great post. im just getting back into fishing this past summer and looking up great things about it...finally went fishing with my dad and caught a jack fish with another fish in his belly not quite digested yet. But you seem very passionate about what you write about with great knowledge. thanks for the words of wisdom...
usana_business
· 1 month ago
wow great post. im just getting back into fishing this past summer and looking up great things about it...finally went fishing with my dad and caught a jack fish with another fish in his belly not quite digested yet. But you seem very passionate about what you write about with great knowledge. thanks for the words of wisdom...
All Comments
A little back story, we are a small, second generation family owned advertising agency that works regionally from Iowa with several larger small business clients (around 100 employees or more) with a couple larger fish as outliers. As I said above, most want to start leveraging social media but don't know where to start. I have outlined a plan of implementation that is a lot like what you mention (2-3 outposts to start - blogging + facebook + twitter or youtube or some combo based on the business). But again, when I present they often say - "Good. Go and do it. We are too busy selling cars or [insert industry task here] to do this plus we don't have the people that know how." So I am somewhat reluctantly kicking off programs as these clients that I hope to "teach them to fish" in the near term as I believe that's how they will truly reap the rewards.
Having said all of this - we are not a traditional 'agency' either. We work very closely with our clients (some of which we've had for over 25 years) so we really function as off-site marketing for several of them. I am rambling but thought you might like to hear a small implementation story from the small biz trenches of Iowa.
Cheers,
Nick Westergaard, Westergaard Advertising
@westerad | nick@westerad.com
I've done a fair bit of fishing in my life and can find many great parallels when compared to the subjects of social media marketing. All great fishermen know a great deal about their environment, the fundamental reasons why fish bite among other things. They can look at all these factors and intuitively predict where the fish will trend and when.
Sailing and fishing. Sounds dreamy.
BUT, I object to "If your company is selling roofing, it might take forever to find people on Twitter and Facebook. It’d be a lot cheaper to buy ads in newspapers and buy better spots in the Yellow Pages."
Is the online advantage only for white collar peeps? No,no,no,no,no. That denies the value completely. Local brick and mortars, just as much as anyone, need to adapt the web to their uses, and figure out how to make it work.
Online marketing takes longer, maybe, but only at first. With consistent attention (as you say), it's far more productive, even for roofers.
But if the buyers aren't exactly there yet, I wouldn't make it a big part of the mix.
Exactly. I've just come home from the second day of an intensive training program: to manage a store operation for Cumberland Farms. What's so cool, for me, is that as a vertically integrated company, our organization is chock full of opportunity to meaningfully deploy a set of tools which could enable conversation points, taken directly from Cumberland Farms' mission statement and desired goals, that support our business objectives.
Internal communications? You bet. Integrated marketing? Yes, of course. But for me, personally, a passion for community presence. *That's* corporate responsibility, yes?
You are rocking it with this segment! Really polished insights, totally worth reading and sharing.
Posts like this really get past what I like to call the fluffy stuff on top of the cake, yet it seems to get much fewer in comments. Of course I'm sure there will be 100 comments here tomorrow and I'll be eating my shoe, but I am finding the same to be true on my blog. Chat about twitter and avatars gets massive comments, but really dive deep and it tends to get less engagement.
Lets keep stretching this thing. Thank you for your mentorship.
I also think that a company should have a clear goal and target in place before they jump into Social Media. Results can be tangible and there are many tools to measure them. This should be the case specially if the initiative does not come from the CEO or a Board member. I've seen too many cases where the company has a great start but management does not get it. The often think that is a waste of time and resources. So a clear strategy is key.
Maybe it is because it is spring.
Chris thanks a million for all of your incredible insight. You challenge us to be smarter and more creative every day.
@Chris ... i see you added DISQUS comments to your blog recently. Cool. I'm curious as to why you added/changed from the other way?
http://twitter.com/franswaa
When does it make sense for a company/nonprofit to 'jump-in' ... ?? I know strategy, thought, planning, goal setting, etc... all is need and has it's place, but sometimes people need to "just do it" right? When does this approach make sense?
Or, when does it make sense for a company/nonprofit to start blogging or using Twitter (or what ever else makes sense for them) without shouting out that they are there ... but just softly jumping into the game to get their feet wet, learn, develop a voice/strategy on the fly?
http://twitter.com/franswaa
As usual a great, informative post. BUT, I do have a challenge with one of your points.
"This means, if you’re thinking that this chore belongs in your agency, I say no. That’s like being invited to chat with Britney Spears, and finding out you’re talking with her assistant. Oh wait, that’s how Britney does it."
Companies should worry less about where their SM person sits and more about who that SM person is. Your comment implies that corp side marketers are better suited to be the ongoing voice of a brand online than their agency counterparts. Why would that be true for more than a single moment or small grouping of moments in time?
Ann, John and all those other folks you can talk to -- they aren't the brand. They're temporary stewards of the brand. If they follow the path that statistically most folks follow with regard to job/companies held in a lifetime, they'll move on. And if they're smart, they'll pass your tended relationship to their successor. But there will be a successor.
Regardless of where that person sits, you're talking to Brittney's assistant. Because Britney doesn't exist and a real, physical manner. She's a phantom tended to and made real by her assistant.
Which brings me to the second half of my point. Your comment seems to suggest that corporate brand managers are better versed in the brand. That they have longer brand histories. And that they are better brand stewards? Sometimes yes, but sometimes times no.
The truth is, Brand Managers change as often and sometimes more often than agency folks. As do the folks that manage almost every aspect of brand marketing today.
Case in point.
After Katrina I returned to TM Advertising (Dallas) and took a long-term project on the American Airlines account while I figured out my next move. TM/AA is where I cut my teeth after college. It had been almost 12 years since I worked on the biz. When I went over to AA for my first meeting, not a single brand manager was there from my first tour of duty. Not one.
But on the agency side of the table, 3 of the 4 senior account folks were the same (including the 2nd in command), the lead creative team (writer/art director) was the same, and the lead Interactive guy was the guy that hired me in 1992.
TM had far more institutional brand knowledge then their client counterparts. These clients had read the files, but their agency partners had written those files. So I ask you, if AA started a SM program right now, where should that SM person sit? Agency side or client side?
My point: the day of the corporate man is over. People in marketing switch positions all the time, whether they are client or agency side is really somewhat irrelevant if you ask me. What matters is, does the person get SM, do they have deep product/brand knowledge, and are they in a position to converse and respond to consumers in real time. If that can only happen with folks that sit inside the company, then so be it. But to issue a blanket statement that says they have to sit in the company or they somehow can't be "the real brand" is incorrect and an unfair slight to agencies that are doing SM for their clients, some quite well. IMHO
Anyhow, my 02. Keep up the great work.
@TomMartin
Where or where is PepsiCo for example. They are slow to respond and not very engaging. If anything they should be leading the charge to get folks talking about their products organically instead of coming up with a lame Pepsi Throwback ad. (Wolfman Jack that guy isn't.)
Where's the on the ground approach of SxSW? They were there, in person, delivering, sharing, and talking about their products. What are they doing now?
Dr.David Black
www.blackchiropractic.com.au
Cheers,
gadgettechblog.com
http://hipfiles.com